In an effort to save taxpayer dollars, South Carolina lawmakers are considering the possibility of eliminating the position of Lieutenant Governor. The proposal comes as the state's Lieutenant Governor Ken Ard is in the midst of an ethics investigation for misuse of campaign funds.
According to two South Carolina legislators, eliminating the position could save taxpayers $1 million a year.
Democratic Senate Minority Leader John Land noted that the position had political power at one time, as the Lieutenant Governor once was responsible for appointing Senate members of conference committees. But since the Senate took that power from the Lieutenant Governor, Land asserted, “That alone is proof that we don’t think it’s a necessary office, and the man does not have enough to do.
As if the list of GOP presidential candidates were not long enough, two new names were tossed around this weekend as possible contenders: Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and Texas Governor Rick Perry. Likewise, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, though not running for President, has indicated that he will be leaving an imprint on the 2012 Republican campaign and will be traveling to Iowa. In an appearance Friday on Sean Hannity's Fox New program, Jeb Bush announced that he should not indefinitely be counted out in 2012.
On the special edition of the Sean Hannity show, a member of the audience asked Governor Bush if he would consider running for President, to which Bush replied, “You never say never.” He added, jokingly, “but I’m never ruling out being on 'Dancing with the Stars' either. The 8-ball that I have on my desk — that I used to make the big decisions when I was governor — says ‘outlook not so good.’”
It’s a fact that Americans have serious health problems caused by their diets. Excessive consumption of fat, sugar, and processed foods is a leading cause of obesity, diabetes, and related illnesses. The question is what to do about it.
The answer, for New York Times food columnist Mark Bittman, is obvious: Put the government in charge of what people eat. And not just any government: Our diet dictator, he writes, “should be the federal government, fulfilling its role as an agent of the public good and establishing a bold national fix.” Constitutionalists point out man’s unalienable rights as set forth in the Declaration of Independence, and the powers delegated to the federal government under the Constitution, which do not include acting as food führer. Something must be done, and to progressives such as Bittman, only Washington can do it.
A lot of good people who believe, as I do, that we need to balance the federal budget have fallen for a very bad idea. I’m referring to the notion that a balanced budget amendment will somehow help solve the fiscal disaster our country faces.
I just got a promotional email from Regnery Publishing, one of my all-time favorite book-publishing companies. I can’t count the number of truly important titles it has issued, from Witness to the whole “politically incorrect guidelines” series. My shelves are filled with things it has done, including numerous best-sellers.
But the most recent email I got from Regnery stopped me short. The subject line read, “Amending the Constitution Is Our Only Hope.”
Walter Williams is associated with that paradoxical phenomenon typically known as “black conservatism.” However, while Williams is a fierce opponent of the leftist political ideology that has overcome the majority of his fellow black Americans — he is a rightist — it is not altogether technically accurate to describe him as a conservative.
Unlike such black thinkers as George Schuyler and Thomas Sowell, as far as his ethical and political philosophical principles are concerned, the most appropriate label to ascribe to Williams is that of libertarian. What this means is that he is a liberal in the classical sense of that term.
Wyoming Governor Matt Mead joins William F. Jasper to discuss stopping ObamaCare, federalism, conservation and why his state has one of the lowest unemployment rates.
Mohammed Sultan is a very successful businessman in India. He cherishes his daughter and so, when she recently married, Sultan decided to throw a big wedding for her guests. Five hundred people showed up and they were treated to a 30-course meal, which included Kashmiri dishes which reflect the rich culinary tradition of northern India. Who in the world could think that a man who worked hard his whole life did not have the right to treat his beloved child to a sumptuous wedding dinner? And when his guests had eaten all they wanted, Sultan threw what was left into the garbage, which prompted a controversy of sorts.
If you want to know whether homosexuals think size matters, the National Institutes for Health can tell you. That's because NIH dumped nearly $1 million into a study of penis size among homosexuals, the Traditional Values Coalition has revealed.
The study, published in 2009, Fox News reports, is titled “The Association Between Penis Size and Sexual Health Among Men Who Have Sex with Men” and involved 1,000 homosexuals and bisexuals.
TVC says the penis survey was included as part of a larger study that cost nearly $10 million. The study was necessary, Fox reports of the study's claims, because "little research [was done] among men who have sex with men assessing the association between penis size and socio-sexual health."
The Army has given a Muslim soldier conscientious objector status, permitting him a discharge, and now the Islamic GI has gone AWOL after being charged with possession of child pornography.
Army Pvt. Naser Abdo, a 20-year-old member of the storied 101st Airborne Division, received CO status because he claimed that Sharia law will not permit him to kill fellow Muslims. Writing in the Washington Times, retired Adm. James A. Lyons says the Army’s decision implicitly concedes that Sharia law trumps the Constitution and the oath a soldier takes to defend the United States against all enemies. CO status for Abdo, he argues, sanctions sedition.
After Abdo refused to deploy to Afghanistan and declared himself a conscientious objector, the Army deferred his deployment to investigate the case.
The Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings July 20 on a possible repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), the 15-year-old law that defines marriage in federal matters as between a man and a woman, and allows states the option of not recognizing the same-sex marriage laws of other states. The hearings highlighted the stark difference between the views of homosexual activists, who testified that the foundations of marriage are personal happiness and financial security, and those of pro-family advocates, who explained that traditional marriage is crucial to the stability and survival of society. Over the past months, President Obama has subtly taken the lead on dismantling DOMA, passed in 1996 by his Democratic predecessor Bill Clinton. On July 19, White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters that Obama is “proud” to support the Respect for Marriage Act, the legislation introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Representative Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) that would effect the repeal of DOMA. “This legislation would uphold the principle that the federal government should not deny gay and lesbian couples the same rights and legal protections as straight couples,” explained Carney. As reported by The New American, in February the President called DOMA unconstitutional and ordered the Department of Justice to stop defending the law in federal court.